Mobile VR vs Head Mounted Display..

so I just got a merge headset for mobile VR on my iphone 6s plus just started to fool around with it yesterday. I was thinking of getting a pimax 4k but also waiting on the Windows Mixed Reality sets.

How much better and noticeable would the video quality be going from Mobile VR to something like pimax or Windows mix reality sets. Would it have more Wow factor? Just wondering what would the comparison be for video quality. My current phone is only does 1080p and I Doubt that is per eye based on the tech. I also feel the viewing field is rather poor in the mobile VR like i can tell i dont have a screen wrapped around and easier to tell im in a box.

It's not just the quality of the screen but you have the controllers as well. If you want the full VR experience you need some room, good controllers, and HMD. This is my opinion so that is about all I/anybody can really give.
I would try them out and decide for yourself. I love my Rift and use it almost daily for games and exercise. I am sure I would of been fine with the Vive as well.

Like Hagrid said it's something you'll need to see for yourself, this is a very difficult tech to recommend because it's impossible to know how different people will perceive it. It's been almost a year since I tired a Gear VR setup and there's just no comparison with that experience and a Vive or Rift and probably coming shortly the Windows Mixed Reality HMDs which might become the way to go without need for external tracking hardware and the price point.

Between the Rift and the Vive, having had the Rift for a month and the Vive with the deluxe audio strap, I'm a bit more partial to the Vive and it's controllers but that's all personal preference. But either one is a blast.

I'm coming from more of strict video quality immerison feel for watching videos, not so much for controls/games.. games is a plus but more for the most immersive high quality video experience. wondering how much improved would it be coming from mobile VR video to Windows mixed reality for example.

I'm coming from more of strict video quality immerison feel for watching videos, not so much for controls/games.. games is a plus but more for the most immersive high quality video experience. wondering how much improved would it be coming from mobile VR video to Windows mixed reality for example.

Click to expand...

No idea. I have only seen small videos of 360 VR. I don't know of any hollywood movie in a 360 VR environment. Unless you are talking 3D, then still have not. 3D isn't all immersive since it's just in front of you with a little depth.(IMO)

I'm coming from more of strict video quality immerison feel for watching videos, not so much for controls/games.. games is a plus but more for the most immersive high quality video experience. wondering how much improved would it be coming from mobile VR video to Windows mixed reality for example.

Click to expand...

For pure video consumption it won't matter much and mobile might be slightly better depending on the screen res and what the headset uses. For example galaxy s8 has a better screen (super AMOLED at 1480x1440 per eye) than either Oculus or Vive or any of the windows MR headsets. I wouldn't bother with windows mixed reality tbh, price difference to a Rift or Vive isn't enough to make the worse tracking worthwhile.

My phone is iphone6s plus, so the videos i can do are only 1080p, when the mixed reality is going to be bigger FOV and 1440p. im prob gonna get one of the mixed reality sets eventually $325 and very small room it should be pretty cool.

My phone is iphone6s plus, so the videos i can do are only 1080p, when the mixed reality is going to be bigger FOV and 1440p. im prob gonna get one of the mixed reality sets eventually $325 and very small room it should be pretty cool.

I'm coming from more of strict video quality immerison feel for watching videos, not so much for controls/games.. games is a plus but more for the most immersive high quality video experience. wondering how much improved would it be coming from mobile VR video to Windows mixed reality for example.

Click to expand...

180/360 videos you consume on a mobile, even with Google Cardboard, are just about on par with how they look on the Rift. I cannot speak for the Vive but I suspect it is the same there since there isn't that much of a drastic difference between their resolutions. As far as the video seeming more immersive due to the FOV coverage, well in that case, and that case only, the Rift has an advantage over something like Google Cardboard where, as you mentioned, looks like you're peaking through a hole in a box.

The big reason why seems to be the 180/360 video capture limitation. I do not think the setups are quite at a level in which they can capture full, crisp, HD video. Not to mention that with players like Jaunt, that have 360 content, the camera stitching is very evident.

Youtube, Jaunt video, and some 360 documentary shorts look the same on my Rift as they did when I stuck my iPhone 6s (non Plus) into a Google Cardboard viewer. If video is all you want from VR, for now, then I would recommend you go with a cheap mobile VR solution.

I believe it will take a very long time before we see any good 360 video due to the fact that the video capture has to be distorted above and below a certain plane and the playback mechanism will always have to map that to a 3D sphere to de-distort the image. That initial capture distortion will always have a much more reduced fidelity no matter how good the playback is at making it appear normal.

180/360 videos you consume on a mobile, even with Google Cardboard, are just about on par with how they look on the Rift. I cannot speak for the Vive but I suspect it is the same there since there isn't that much of a drastic difference between their resolutions. As far as the video seeming more immersive due to the FOV coverage, well in that case, and that case only, the Rift has an advantage over something like Google Cardboard where, as you mentioned, looks like you're peaking through a hole in a box.

The big reason why seems to be the 180/360 video capture limitation. I do not think the setups are quite at a level in which they can capture full, crisp, HD video. Not to mention that with players like Jaunt, that have 360 content, the camera stitching is very evident.

Youtube, Jaunt video, and some 360 documentary shorts look the same on my Rift as they did when I stuck my iPhone 6s (non Plus) into a Google Cardboard viewer. If video is all you want from VR, for now, then I would recommend you go with a cheap mobile VR solution.

I believe it will take a very long time before we see any good 360 video due to the fact that the video capture has to be distorted above and below a certain plane and the playback mechanism will always have to map that to a 3D sphere to de-distort the image. That initial capture distortion will always have a much more reduced fidelity no matter how good the playback is at making it appear normal.

Click to expand...

Honestly, most 360 video is useless. There's little to no point looking behind you in most of it as the action is in front. I'd rather have the same bitrate in a 180 video as it'll be a whole lot clearer video directly in front of you. To that point, you won't find much (any?) 360 video that can actually fill all the pixels in any of the headsets, even mobile, while you can find some 180 videos that do. Even then, my shitty internet can't stream the highest quality 180 videos at full quality, let alone a 360 video that had enough pixels to fill even a lower end mobile headset. If you have gigabit internet and can even find any 360 video at that quality, it might be worth it, but I haven't seen it.

In short I agree, for video there's little point buying a higher end headset. But if you want to do anything other than video, it's worth it, and I don't know why you wouldn't spend $30 more for a Rift over any of the windows MR headsets unless you had a very specific use case (like a PC that can only handle a single usb 3 device or something unicornish like that) or where you want to take the headset with you all the time and don't want to spend 3 minutes to re-calibrate when you do. Reviews peg the tracking at PSVR levels which is like centimeter level tracking vs. milimeter level tracking for Oculus (and Vive). Controllers also have to be in field of view of the headset where Oculus (and Vive) can track them anywhere. The milimeter level tracking alone is worth $30 extra.

The Windows Media Sets for example the ASUS has a higher resolution and little no SHD compared to the Rift its a huge improvement (based on reviews), the only different then is the tracking and I'd prefer the inside out tracking rather setting up sensors and having a shit ton of more cables everywhere.

With that said you are stating a 1080p video on my phone is going to look the same as a 1440p video on a headset? You would figure the quality it would be hell of a lot more crisper? I guess i could always try to get a pimax 4k if and when it drops extremely low in price like dirt cheap. heard its great for videos.

The Windows Media Sets for example the ASUS has a higher resolution and little no SHD compared to the Rift its a huge improvement (based on reviews), the only different then is the tracking and I'd prefer the inside out tracking rather setting up sensors and having a shit ton of more cables everywhere.

With that said you are stating a 1080p video on my phone is going to look the same as a 1440p video on a headset? You would figure the quality it would be hell of a lot more crisper? I guess i could always try to get a pimax 4k if and when it drops extremely low in price like dirt cheap. heard its great for videos.

Asus = 1440x1440 (per eye),2880x1440 (combined)

Rift = 2160 x 1200

Click to expand...

Trust me, video consumption is not up to par on VR. HD doesn't look all that HD. There is still a lot of fuzziness.

I have a 180 video weighing in at 11GB (45 minutes) rendered at 3200x1600 which comes out to be 1600x1600 per eye and through the Rift and it looks a slightly bit less fuzzy than when downsampled to 1080p for my iPhone 6s through Cardboard.

It comes down to lens distortion from both the capture and the headset. I'd wager that more of the distortion comes from the capture method and the projection to a 3D hemisphere.

Think of it like this: in a 2D 1080p video played on a 1080p screen, one pixel is matched to one pixel on your screen. In VR, the captured video is distorted using something like a fish eye, or globe-type, lens and then that is mapped to a 3D sphere during playback. In playback, one captured pixel is projected to an area on the 3D sphere which means it looses fidelity as it is blown up to map to a small section of the sphere. A pixel is like a square that gets coned out to cover a slightly bigger area. There isn't a true one-to-one pixel match during payback so it doesn't really matter if the video resolution matches or exceeds the video resolution of the HMD.

why are people blow away by VR in a headset when a mobile vr is 90% cheaper and just slightly worse? Very odd indeed. I will say the mobile vr headset feels a bit clunky as F though im sure the mounted display ones are more comfortable.

The Windows Media Sets for example the ASUS has a higher resolution and little no SHD compared to the Rift its a huge improvement (based on reviews), the only different then is the tracking and I'd prefer the inside out tracking rather setting up sensors and having a shit ton of more cables everywhere.

With that said you are stating a 1080p video on my phone is going to look the same as a 1440p video on a headset? You would figure the quality it would be hell of a lot more crisper? I guess i could always try to get a pimax 4k if and when it drops extremely low in price like dirt cheap. heard its great for videos.

Asus = 1440x1440 (per eye),2880x1440 (combined)

Rift = 2160 x 1200

Click to expand...

I don't think an extra 10% pixels per eye is going to make a huge difference in SD especially given they're lcd's instead of OLED. Reports I've seen haven't said they're any better IQ wise (and sometimes slightly worse depending on the headset due to some lcd persistence), but there aren't a ton of full reviews out yet.

So with higher res than your mobile, you'll see less screen door but honestly if the video is low bitrate and pixelated, that's not what you'll be seeing. I think a high quality 180 video will definiutely look better on a higher end set, but nowhere near worth the 10x increase in cost just for videos. The Asus headset is pegged at $449 at this point, which is $80 more than a Rift. To be clear, a 1080p 180 video is not going to be 1:1 pixel mapped on your 1080p phone, it will be a lot less as you will only see about 90 degress of that 180 fov horizontally at a time and maybe the same vertically - so to get 1:1 pixel mapping on even a 1080p phone, you'll need 4x the pixels (so 4k video just for 180). For a 360 video, double it again, so you'll need 8x the pixels to have clear video in 360 degrees around you. For one of these MR headsets or a Rift/Vive, you'll need even more pixels than that, and that video res can't be effectively streamed without a lot of compression artifacts etc. So yeah, you'll have less SD, but the video will be low quality enough that that's not what you'll notice.

I don't think an extra 10% pixels per eye is going to make a huge difference in SD especially given they're lcd's instead of OLED. Reports I've seen haven't said they're any better IQ wise (and sometimes slightly worse depending on the headset due to some lcd persistence), but there aren't a ton of full reviews out yet.

So with higher res than your mobile, you'll see less screen door but honestly if the video is low bitrate and pixelated, that's not what you'll be seeing. I think a high quality 180 video will definiutely look better on a higher end set, but nowhere near worth the 10x increase in cost just for videos. The Asus headset is pegged at $449 at this point, which is $80 more than a Rift. To be clear, a 1080p 180 video is not going to be 1:1 pixel mapped on your 1080p phone, it will be a lot less as you will only see about 90 degress of that 180 fov horizontally at a time and maybe the same vertically - so to get 1:1 pixel mapping on even a 1080p phone, you'll need 4x the pixels (so 4k video just for 180). For a 360 video, double it again, so you'll need 8x the pixels to have clear video in 360 degrees around you. For one of these MR headsets or a Rift/Vive, you'll need even more pixels than that, and that video res can't be effectively streamed without a lot of compression artifacts etc. So yeah, you'll have less SD, but the video will be low quality enough that that's not what you'll notice.

Click to expand...

i can get the dell set for $320 w/ a member discount. ill use it for steam vr and videos, prob be cool.

why are people blow away by VR in a headset when a mobile vr is 90% cheaper and just slightly worse? Very odd indeed. I will say the mobile vr headset feels a bit clunky as F though im sure the mounted display ones are more comfortable.

The key differences are MUCH better tracking and the ability to actually interact with your VR environment. Both lead to vastly improved immersion/presence... you are inside the world you are experiencing vs just being an observer.

Also, you really have to experience it first hand. Picking one without having experienced both is like buying a car based solely on someone else's vague description of its color...

Nope. Neither Rift nor Vive is designed to take advantage of SLI as far as native driver support goes, however, some in-game engines can if the developers choose to put the time and effort into it. So, right now, VR SLI support is extremely limited. Serious Sam VR is the only game that I am aware of that can... that and Nvidia’s Fun House demo.

I'm coming from more of strict video quality immerison feel for watching videos, not so much for controls/games.. games is a plus but more for the most immersive high quality video experience. wondering how much improved would it be coming from mobile VR video to Windows mixed reality for example.

Click to expand...

I am starting to see "experience" games on the Oculus store that are immersive movies. It's 3D and you are in it, but prescripted events that you just watch. I think it has potential to be great in the future.

I tried HTC Vive for an hour but cannot yet afford to buy it and I have no enough space in my apartment. So I went with Daydream for my Moto Z for 50 EUR. And WOW, I didn't think I will be impressed after Vive but I do. I feel image quality is better on the phone , probably because Moto Z has a good display. It is smooth and has good games. The only downside I see that phone gets very very hot after a while.

Anyway I already 2 days into Daydream and I think I it will not collect dust on the shelf. Unless of course if I played all good games from Play Store

Using daydream is great but I have an HP WMR and I have found it to be far better than trying to use mobile. Especially for gaming because it has controllers, as well as the ability to extend to multiple virtual displays for my more typical browsing.